Page:The Complete Peerage Ed 1 Vol 5.djvu/116

 114 IiTSLK. been styled Loud Lisle,(- 1 ) after her father's death, from whom she inherited very considerable estates. She d. 20 March 1391/2, and he d. s.p.m., 13 July 1117, in his 65th year, both being bur. nt Wottou under Edge, co. Glouc. See fuller particulars under " Berkeley " Barony, cr. 1295, sub the 5th Lord, IV, 1392, Jf. Elizabeth [de jure), sko jure Baroness Lisle, da. to and h., aged 30 at her father's death in 1417 and then wife of Richard 1420? (Beauchaiii'), Eahl ok Warwick, whom she m. (as his first wife) before May 1399, who <C 30 April 1-139, leaving (by a second wife) male issue. See fuller particulars under "Wahwick" Earldom. She was living 1417 but d. s.p.m. before Nov. 1423 and was bur. in Kingswood Abbey, Wilts, when the Barony fell into abeyance between her three daughters and coheirs.( b ) Barony. 1. Sir JonN Talbot, 4th s. of John (Talbot), 1st Earl 1 1 444 0K Shrewsbury, being s, and h. of his second wife. Margaret, da. of " Richard (Beaucuaui'), 12th Earl or Warwick, which Margaret was Viscountcy. 1st da. and coheir of that EaiTs,/(Y.rf wife, Elizabeth, suo jure Baroness . . ,., Lislf, uboveuamed, was b. about 1423, and, having been knhihtcd, was 1. 1491. a .. t o,5 j„iy (1444), 22 Hen. VI., LOKD AND BARON OF LISLE (" Dominum et Baronem dc Lisle ") with rem. to his heirs beiwj Lards of the manor of Kingston Lisle, Berks,( u ) it being recited in this charter (one of the most extraordinary ou record) as a fact( 1 ') that the grantee's ancestor " Warine de (») His da., the Countess of Warwick, is called on her monument " filia et Inures Thoma?, nnper Dni de Berkeley et de Lisle." See vol. i, p. 329, note "b," tub "Berkeley." ( h ) See vol. i, p. 329, note "c," sub "Berkeley," as to these three ladies, viz. (1) Margaret, Countess of Shrewsbury (2) Eleanor, Baroness de Boos, and (3) Elizabeth, Baroness Latimer. In 1824 the coheirs to the Barony of Lisle [cr. 1 357] are set forth in the case presented to the House of Lords on behalf of Sir John Shelley Sydney, Bart, (who petitioned for the determination of the abeyance in his favour ) as under — (I) " Sir John Shelley Sjduey, Bart., as sole heir of the body of Margaret, Countess of Shrewsbury, above mentioned (II) George, Earl of Essex, Sir Henry Huuloke, Bart., and Charlotte, Baroness de Bos, as coheirs of the body of Eleanor, wife of Thomas, Lord Roos (III) Hugh, Duke of Northumberland, Wiuehcomb Henry Howard Hartley, Esq., James Knightley, Esq., Grey Jcruiyn Grove, Esq, George William Villiers, Esq., Montague, Earl of Abingdon, Sir Francis Burdett, Bart., William Fermor, Esq., and John, Lord Rollo, as coheirs of the body of Elizabeth, Lady Latimer. These individuals were, also, it is presumed, coheirs of the body [sic] of the Barony of Berkeley under the writ of summons to Thomas de Berkeley, 23 June (23 Edw, I.), 1295, being coheirs of the body of the said Thomas de Berkeley." [Courthope.] The petition was, however, without success, for " in 1826 the House of Lords resolved that there did not appear sufficient ground to advise His Majesty to allow the claim of the Petitioner. The claimant's case was considered to have failed for want of proof that either of bis ancestors had ever taken their seats and sat in Pari, a fact necessary to be established by the Records of Pari, in order to give a dignity «/ inheritance to a writ of summons." See a pamphlet on " Barons by tenure" by Sir C. G. Young, Garter. The claimant's only son, however, received (as a con- solation) a peerage in 1835, viz., the Barony of De L'Isle and Dudley of Penshuhst. His descent from Gerard, 1st Lord Lisle (1357), was thro' the families of Shelley, Perry, Sydney, Dudley, Grey, Talhot, Beauchanip, Berkeley, and De Lisle. See vol. iii, p. 53, note " a,'' under " De L'Isle " etc, Barony, sr. 1835. ( c ) See vol. ii, p. 14, note " b," sub " Breadalbane," for a curious proviso (of like nature) in the creation of that Earldom (S.] in lo'Sl tte.. that in the event of the non- possession of the estate of Glenurchy certain of the dignities created should cease. ( d ) This assertion, says Nicolas, is "satisfactorily proved, by the Lords' Committee on the Dignity of a Peer of the Realm in their Third Report, to have been entirely without foundation, for not only had the said manor never been held I'M CO],ile of the Crown, but a period of above sixty years had elapsed (««., from 23 Edw. I. to 31 Edw. I1L), after writs of summons were generally issued, before the family of L'Isle,